License confusion


I plan to compose electroacoustic pieces and therefore producing an App (with audio i/o, midi and OSC) along the musical score the musician (whom the piece le dedicated) would play.

In that perspective, I should get paid as a composer when the piece is commissioned and then each time the piece is performed thanks to author right (SACEM).

In this context, I dont sell the app that come with the score but I get paid for my composer work.
However, I would not want that some custom DSP I’d had made with Faust, a particular routing specific to the piece or if the app include some live automated algorythmic composition rules, I’d not like that another composer could just reuse as is or with a little modification my work. Indeed, the app and the score become the whole piece.

  1. What garantee to me the paternity if the app is released under GPL ?

  2. Will my Faust code become GPL if I use GPL-ed JUCE ?

  3. As an individual, are my other activities (instrumental music, teaching, …) taken in account when we are speaking about revenues <50k and so on ?

  4. Is the utilisation of JUCE described above considered “no revenue” if I want to closed the source but keeping using JUCE freely ?

  5. If not, is there a mean to use GPL-ed JUCE and make something to keep paternity or to make a copyright for instance over the custom DSP generated by Faust, the routing, or the C++ code that is in this case the “score for the computer” : wait Bb on mic4 then start seq(1)…

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Looking forward to reading you !
All the Best.

I am not a lawyer, but this is my interpretation of JUCE’s licensing terms:

Under the GPL, you would be obliged to distribute copies of the source code alongside any copies of the compiled executable that you distribute. Recipients of the work would automatically receive a license to run, modify, and propagate the work under the terms of the GPL.

The source for a work means all the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to control those activities. I think this would mean that the entire source of your program, including Faust sources, would need to be
licensed under the GPL.

The revenue or funding limit applies to the “whole organisation”. It is not based upon revenue generated by software containing JUCE nor the budget of a particular team or individual within an organisation.

If your organisation generates revenue, all of this revenue counts towards the revenue limit. Therefore, I think the revenue sources you mentioned would count.

If you don’t propagate or convey the work to others then you could license your work under the GPL without licensing the work to anyone else. However, if you propagate or convey the work to anyone else (composers, sound technicians, etc.) then you would need to provide them with the corresponding source for the work, and those individuals would automatically receive a license to run, modify, and propagate the work under the terms of the GPL.

For more information, please see the JUCE Licensing FAQ and the text of the GPLv3. If you have further questions we’ll do our best to answer them.

Thank you taking the time to answer my question !
If I’ve understood correctly, for instance : an already established film composer earn more than 50k per year. That person want to start composing electroacoustic pieces and download JUCE, a framework new to her. That person, the composer, want to keep the code closed source.
Conclusion : in that scenario that person has to buy a JUCE license, right ?


Also not a lawyer, but I always assumed that the income limit refers to all income from any source.

For example in this imaginary scenario:

• an individual working as web developer earning $75k / year
• produces a plugin to be given away for free
• wishes to keep the source closed

would require a JUCE Indy license in this case, if they earned more than $500k / year they would require a Pro license, even though the plugin itself is entirely free and generating no income.

Thank you. Now its very clear.
Have a good day !


About the Faust code, you can read: Frequently Asked Questions - Faust Documentation